What are the effects of adding TI-Navigator to a graphing calculator classroom?

1. 2011 T-cubed, San Antonio, TX Stephen J. Pape, University of Florida What are the effects of adding TI-Navigator to a graphing calculator classroom? The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305K050045 to The Ohio State University.  The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the U.S. Department of Education.

2. Research Team Members

3. Project Overview • Professional development & research project • Algebra 1 & physical science • TI-Navigator—Classroom connectivity technology (CCT) • Summer institute • Teachers Teaching with Technology Conference, annual follow-up

4. Prior Research – Audience Response Systems • Early research – ARS without instructional change has little impact • More recent research has provided evidence for several affordances: • Increased attendance and participation • Collaborative learning • Student engagement • Increased comprehension • Student satisfaction • Increased teacher knowledge of student understanding • Technology-facilitated interactive engagement in ARS lecture classes is correlated with student conceptual gains (Judson & Sawada, 2002)

5. Changing conception of mathematics competence (Kilpatrick, Swafford, & Findel, 2001) • Adaptive Reasoning • Strategic Competence • Conceptual Understanding • Productive Dispositions • Procedural Fluency

6. Changing roles for teachers include • Thinking beyond skills-based conceptions • Setting norms for discourse • Using problem solving and inquiry to support knowledge construction • Using formative as well as summative assessment • Developing self-regulated learning

7. Connected Classroom Technology • Features of the TI-Navigator™ connected classroom • Collaborative & motivating learning environment • Technology-assisted formative assessment • Increased teacher knowledge of students • Increased feedback to students & teacher • Interactive learning • Engage students in discourse to examine correct and incorrect responses • Access multiple representations • Higher demands for participation

8. Affordances of Classroom Interactions • Classroom interactions support ... • Students’ understanding of mathematics • Students’ understanding of what it means to act competently as a mathematics students • Teachers’ use of formative assessment • CCT provides a mechanism for classroom communication that increases students’ ability to engage with mathematics content

9. Research Questions • What is the impact of teacher implementation of CCT on ... • Students’ algebra achievement? • Classroom communication?

10. Logic Model

11. Research Design • Randomized assignment to treatment and control/delayed treatment groups • Control group provided treatment in year 2 Teach Algebra I with TI-Navigator and graphing calculators Teach Algebra I with TI-Navigator and graphing calculators Student Pretest Student Posttest Student Pretest Student Posttest TI-Navigator PD No PD Teachers with graphing calculator experience Teach Algebra I with TI-Navigator and graphing calculators Teach Algebra I with calculators or no technology TI-Navigator PD No PD Academic Year –Year 1 Academic Year –Years 2 & 3 Summer Year 1 Summer Year 2

12. Participants (Year 1) • 68 teachers (Rx = 34, C = 34) • 1,128 students • Rx = 617; 50% female • C = 511; 57% female • Classroom observations in 18 treatment and 16 control classrooms

13. Teacher Persistence

14. Teacher Data Sources • Demographic Information Form • Teacher Telephone Interviews • Frequency of technology use; teacher perceptions of improved understanding of student knowledge; and teacher perceptions of instructional changes resulting from CCT use • Videotaped Two-day Classroom Observations • M = 106.15 min, SD = 35.36 min • Max = 162.00 min; Min = 38.30 min • Post-observation interviews

15. Student Measures • Algebra I pretest –30 item; 23 multiple choice, 3 short-answer, and 4 extended response • Algebra I posttest –30 items; 24 multiple choice, 1 short-answer, and 5 extended response • Student focus groups

16. Quantitative Data Analyses • Hierarchical Linear Modeling—takes into consideration that students are “nested” within classrooms • Comparisons • Year 1 – CCT vs. graphing calculator only • Years 2-3 – CCT vs. year 1 graphing calculator only

17. Summary of Quantitative Findings(Pape, Irving, et al., 2010; Irving et al., 2010) • Students in classrooms incorporating CCT outperformed their peers in control classrooms during Year 1 implementation (δ = 0.30) • approx 20-36% improvement over expected annual growth • The treatments produced similar effects to 10-15 years of teaching experience • On average CCT classrooms outperformed Year 1 controls across four years of the project

18. Summary of Quantitative Findings (Lee et al., 2010; Pape, Irving, et al., 2010; Pape, Bell, Owens, S. K., et al., 2010) • Teachers reported greater knowledge of their students’ understanding, which was related to student achievement (p = .013) • Students reported greater engagement in connected classrooms • Frequency of technology use alone, however, was negatively associated with achievement

19. Qualitative Data AnalysesClassroom Observation Constructs • Questioning patterns: • Directionality • Type (Recitation, Authentic) • Cognitive load (LO vs. HO) • Mathematics comments: • S-S Interaction (duration) • Responses to students • IRE pattern • Uptake • Press for involvement, elaboration, or explanation • Classroom observations were transcribed and coded for interactional patterns

20. Typical Mathematics discourse (Pape, Bell, et al., 2010) • Dominated by teacher-led discourse and thinking—students frequently compute basic operations rather than think mathematically • Predominantly T-S questions that require short known-answer responses (4 words long) • Initiate-Respond-Evaluate • Teacher math statements—4.5 times longer than students’

21. Impact of CCT on discourse (Pape, Bell, et al., 2010) • TI-Navigator seems to disrupt the questioning episodes • Control teachers asked more questions overall, typically occurring in IRE sequences • Recitation questions that elicited lower-order responses • Trend: Control teachers’ math statements shorter than treatment • No differences for uptake, press for involvement, or press for explanations and elaborations

22. Effective Implementation of CCT (Pape, et al., in press) • Effective use of CCT makes possible the transference of mathematical thinking from the teacher to the student • Principle 1: Mathematical tasks that support pattern examination leading to generalizations and conceptual development • Principle 2: Classroom interactions that focus mathematical thinking within students and the collective class • Principle 3: Formative assessment leading to teachers’ and students’ increased knowledge of students’ present understandings • Principle 4: Sustained engagement in mathematical thinking

23. Conclusions: Strong Findings from Randomized Control Trials Are Rare in Education • Integrating PD and TI-Navigator produced effects comparable to a 20% – 36% improvement over expected annual growth • Improved “teacher knowledge of students” shows the unique benefit of TI-Navigator • Typical classroom profiles, however, indicate that mathematics instruction is predominated by teacher-centered behaviors • TI-Navigator use may have disrupted some of the typical classroom behaviors

24. 2011 T-cubed, San Antonio, TX Stephen J. Pape, University of Florida(spape@ufl.edu) This presentation will be available on the CCMS websitehttp://ccms.osu.edu/ The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305K050045 to The Ohio State University.  The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the U.S. Department of Education.

25. Selected References (also available on CCMS website or from spape@ufl.edu) Irving, K. E., Pape, S. J., Owens, D. T., Abrahamson, A. L., Silver, D., & Sanalan, V. A. (2010, May). Longitudinal study of classroom connectivity in promoting mathematics and science achievement: Years 1-3. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO. Irving, K. E., Sanalan, V. A., & Shirley, M. L. (2009). Physical science connected classrooms: Case studies. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 28, 247-275. Owens, D. T., Pape, S. J., Irving, K. E., Sanalan, V.A. , Boscardin, C. K., & Abrahamson, L. (2008, July). The connected algebra classroom: A randomized control trial. In C. Laborde & C. Knigos (Eds.). Proceedings for Topic Study Group 22, Eleventh International Congress on Mathematics Education. Monterrey, Mexico. Retrieved July 2, 2009 fromhttp://tsg.icme11.org/document/get/249 Pape, S. J., Bell, C. V., Owens, S. K., Bostic, J. D., Irving, K. E., Owens, D. T., et al. (2010, May). Examining verbal interactions within connected mathematics classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO. Pape, S. J., Bell, C. V., Owens, D. T., & Sert, Y. (2010). Examining teachers’ use of the TI-Navigator™ to support students’ understanding of quadratic equations and parabolas. Manuscript in preparation. Pape, S. J., Irving, K. E., Owens, D. T., Boscardin, C. K., Sanalan, V. A., Abrahamson, A. L., et al. (2010). Classroom connectivity in algebra I classrooms: Results of a randomized control trial. Manuscript submitted for publication. Pape, S. J., Irving, K. E.,Bell, C. V., Shirley, M. L., Owens, D. T., Owens, S., Bostic, J. D., & Lee, S. C. (in press, 2011). Principles of effective pedagogy within the context of connected classroom technology: Implications for teacher knowledge. In R. N. Ronau, C. R. Rakes, & M. L. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-60960-750-0